Risk Assessment Presentation


Published on

Presentation detailing the risks to pedestrians and cyclist in Monroe County on bike paths

1 Comment
  • Ox80072efd error can be resolved best with registry repair software and also it maintains health of system along with certain boost up in your system.
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Title Slide:
  • OutlineAssume 8th Grade Education
  • State Road 45 put in our GIS routes with hotspots
  • State Road 45 put in our GIS routes with hotspots
  • State Road 45 put in our GIS routes with hotspots
  • State Road 45 put in our GIS routes with hotspots
  • State Road 46
  • CardiovascularIncreased myocardial ischemiaPro-inflammatory mediatorsAtherosclerosisLeukocyte and platelet activationArrhythmiaIncreased risk of diabetes and hypertensionIncreased levels of CRPIncreased coagulabilityAltered rheologyCancerLung CancerLeukemiaPremature Death
  • Road CharacteristicsLane Width, Bike Lane, etc.Traffic and Bicycle VolumeMotor Vehicle Volume, Ped Volume, and Cyclist VolumeConfounding FactorsWeather, Commercial/Residential, Daily Changes in BehaviorDriver and Bicyclist ErrorFaulty bicycle mechanists
  • Risk Assessment Presentation

    1. 1. Bicyclist Health and Safety Issues on Four Alternative Transportation Routes<br />Monroe County Alternative Transportation Plan Risk Assessment<br />Craig Harper · ZeynepAltinay<br />Courtney Bonney ·Max Jie Cui<br />
    2. 2. Outline<br /><ul><li>Intro and Problem Formulation
    3. 3. Current Routes and Alternatives
    4. 4. Hazard ID</li></ul>Health <br />Safety<br />Health Effects<br />Exposure<br />Modeling<br />Risk Characterization<br />Causes of Accidents<br />Predictive Modeling<br /><ul><li>Uncertainty
    5. 5. Recommendations
    6. 6. Conclusion</li></li></ul><li>Introduction<br />Problem Overview: When sharing roads with vehicles, bicyclists are exposed to health and safety risks from exhaust and accidents<br />Key Question of Project: How would risks to bicyclists change on 4 priority routes with alternatives considered by Monroe County?<br />Goal: Inform the Monroe County Council of the relative risks to both health and safety from current and alternative routes.<br />
    7. 7. Target population<br />Current study:<br />Adult male<br />18-30 years old<br />70 kg weight<br />Cycling at a moderate pace (13 mph) <br />Asthmatic adult male<br />Future Studies:<br />Adult female<br />Elderly<br />Children<br />
    8. 8. Hazard ID<br />Criteria Pollutants<br />Sulfur Dioxide<br />Nitrogen Oxides<br />Particulate matter &lt; 2.5 µm<br />Hazardous Air Pollutants<br />VOCs (e.g. Benzene)<br />
    9. 9. Bicyclists’ Health and Safety: A Conceptual Site Model<br />Bicyclists share roads with vehicles<br />Road Characteristics<br />(type, lane width, shoulder, <br />sidewalk, signage, bike lanes, etc)<br />Pollutants emitted from vehicles Function of: fleet makeup, traffic volume, fuel composition, season<br />Driver and Bicyclists Error<br />Dispersal of Pollutants<br />Function of: wind velocity, mixing height, season, buffer width<br />Accident Rate<br />Traffic and Bicycle Volume <br />(vary spatially and temporally)<br />Inhalation of Pollutants <br />Function of: inhalation rate (varies with population)<br />Confounding Factors<br />Weather, distractions<br />Pollutant Dose<br />Function of: absorption<br />Endpoints: Predicted number of accidents on a given route (accidents/year)<br />Health Response (acute or chronic)<br />Endpoints: Risk to bicyclists from particular pollutants (mg/kg/day) over the course of 30 years<br />
    10. 10. Routes<br />
    11. 11. Route 1State Road 46<br />Commuter Route with a possible greenway option that would encourage recreational users<br />Vehicle Traffic Volume:<br />Current: 10704-19071 Avg: 15000<br />Alternative 1: 10700<br />Alternative 2: 4900-13000<br />
    12. 12. Route 2State Road 45<br />Recreational Route from Lake Lemon into Bloomington<br />Vehicle Traffic Volume:<br />Current: 3422-11491 Avg: 5225<br />Typical Multiuse Volumes: <br />
    13. 13. Route 33rd to Ivy Tech<br />Commuter Route to Ivy Tech<br />Vehicle Traffic Volume:<br />Current: 102 – 42803 Avg: 17100<br />Alternative 1:<br />Alternative 2:<br />
    14. 14. Route 4Fairfax Rd<br />Recreational Route from Clear Creek Trail head to Monroe Lake Beach and Four Winds Resort<br />Volume:<br />Current: 49-6860 Avg: 2270<br />
    15. 15. Options<br />
    16. 16. Health<br />
    17. 17. Exposure: Methods<br />EPA ‘s Mobile 6.2 Emissions Modeling Software<br />Estimates emissions (g/s or g/day)<br />Assumes average fleet makeup, traffic volumes, seasonal variations, fuel composition, average speed<br />http://elseware.univ-pau.fr/MAINPAGEPUB/carpollu/pol1.gif<br />
    18. 18. Dispersion Box Model<br />Concentration (C)<br />Where ,<br />The emission rate per unit area<br />Assumptions of the box model:<br />Concentrations are homogenous within the box.<br />Sources distribute uniformly.<br />Emitted pollutants instantaneously and uniformly mix.<br />A wind of constant speed flows across the cells cross-sectional area<br />(Schnelle and Dey, 2000)<br />
    19. 19. Calculation of Intakes<br />Where:<br />I ≡ intake (mg/kg bodyweight/day)<br />C ≡ chemical concentration (mg/s)<br />CR ≡ contact rate (m3/hr)<br />EFD ≡ exposure frequency and duration<br />EFD = EF*ED<br />EF ≡ exposure frequency (days/year)<br />ED ≡ exposure duration (years)<br />BW ≡ bodyweight; the average bodyweight over the exposure period (kg)<br />AT ≡ averaging time; time over which exposure is averaged (days)<br />
    20. 20. Combined Health Effects<br />Respiratory<br />Inflammation<br />Reduced Lung Function (FEV1/FVC)<br />Increased Upper Respiratory Infections<br />Bronchitis<br />Pneumonia<br />Allergic Reactions<br />Exacerbation of COPD, Asthma, and Emphysema<br />Central Nervous System<br />Headaches/Dizziness/Vomiting<br />Brain damage <br />asphyxiation<br />Stroke<br />Coma (VOCs)<br />Cardiovascular<br />Increased myocardial ischemia<br />Pro-inflammatory mediators<br />Atherosclerosis<br />Leukocyte and platelet activation<br />Arrhythmia<br />Increased risk of diabetes and hypertension<br />Cancer<br />Lung Cancer<br />Leukemia<br />Premature Death<br />
    21. 21. Non-Cancer<br />Reference dose=Threshold Dose/U.F.<br />U.F.s depend on the type of study<br />Large RfCs indicate weaker pollutants<br />
    22. 22. Cancer<br />VOCs (Benzene as an example) and PM have the ability to cause cancer<br />Risk measured as Unit Risk: risk per µg/m3 breathed<br />Benzene – Leukemia (EPA, 1998)<br />Unit Risk = 7.8E-03 (mg/m3)-1<br />Slope Factor = 2.73E-02 (mg/kg-day)<br />
    23. 23. Modeling Uncertainties<br />Calculated RfC from threshold doses <br />corrected for uncertainty (see table)<br />Utilized @Risk to run 5000 iterations <br />5 frequency durations ranging from 50-250 days <br />Used @Risk to place uncertainty values around:<br /> wind speed<br />mixing height<br />width of box<br />
    24. 24. Non-Cancer Output from @risk<br />Calculated a HQ with nested uncertainties for the longest route in 4 seasons<br />NOx: HQ&gt;1<br />All other pollutants HQ&lt;1<br />Relative Hazard Index, sum of the HQs, calculated for varying proposed alternatives<br />
    25. 25. Results: Non-Cancer<br />Using the Mean<br />
    26. 26. Results: Cancer<br />Benzene<br />Intake = 0.14 µg/m3<br />
    27. 27. Data gaps/uncertainty<br />Mobile 6.2<br /> default traffic volume assumption<br />no account of road dust<br />exposure from ingestion<br />mixing height assumptions<br />interactive effects of pollutants<br />
    28. 28. Safety<br />3 June 2008, US-Mexico Border<br />
    29. 29. Bicycle Accident Rates: Contributing Factors<br />Road Characteristics<br />Traffic and Bicycle Volume<br />Confounding Factors<br />Driver and Bicyclist Error<br />
    30. 30. Predictive Modeling of Accidents:Data Sources<br />
    31. 31. Assumption: Bicycle/pedestrian volume<br />Months of Cycling<br />Michael Steinhoff and Julie Harpring. (2008). Transportation and Sustainability on the Indiana University, Bloomington Campus.<br />
    32. 32. Variables for 2 Types of Model<br />
    33. 33. Model Type I – Bicycle <br />Y = − 0.00308 + 0.70576abm – 0.00513aps – 0.25012week + 0.00014143B2 + ut<br />R2= 16.36% F=17.5 P=0.0001<br /> <br />Y = Number of accident(s) on each day of 2008 <br />abm = Hourly Bike flow adjusted by month; t=7.07<br />aps = Hourly pedestrian flow adjusted by season; t=5.5<br />week = (Weekend=1, weekday=0); t=4.4<br />B2=Abm2 ; t=0.88<br />
    34. 34. Model Type II<br /> Y = 0.61697 +0.00005965TF +0.06912LW2 +0.19403BLW -0.84127Int <br /> -0.28712Curb -0.21508SD+ 0.34976 CR<br />R2=96.63% F =36.81 P=0.0001 <br />Y = # of Accidents on each selected road in 2008 <br />TF = Average Traffic Flow per day (2008) t=7.39<br />LW = Lane Width t=24.99<br />BLW = Bike Lane Width t=3.87<br />Intersection (INT) = (Yes=1, No=0) t=-3.55<br />Curb (CB) = (Yes=1, No=0) t=1.88 <br />Sidewalk (SD) = (Yes=1, No=0) t=1.45<br /> CR = (Commercial =1,Residential=0) t=2.27<br />
    35. 35. Limitations<br />Cannot account for human behavior<br />Mixed-Poisson Distribution Model<br />Data is very limited in this area. <br />Specification Error<br />
    36. 36. Next steps to improve accident modeling<br />Collect more data of risk characteristics on our primary routes (accidents!)<br />Adjust the model by adopting Mixed Poisson Distribution and take human behavior into consideration<br />Improve the assumptions by getting more official data<br />
    37. 37. Conclusions<br />Little evidence of serious risk due to air pollutants on current routes<br />Cannot make predictions of accidents on rural routes based on our model<br />Cannot make generalizations about effects of multi-use path with our model<br />Traffic calming measures (reduction of volume) seems to be more effective at reducing accidents than adding bike lanes<br />
    38. 38. Further Considerations<br />Value of increasing perceived safety<br />Produce a map of county bike routes with safety rating based on road characteristics to inform bicyclists of options<br />